IF all film production ceased overnight, we still have the option of rolling back the clock and pouring our own plates. This however, is very much dependent on the availability of the raw chemicals - The way things are going, even the purchase of sodium chloride might become restricted to a few licensed individuals at some point in the future.

IF all film production ceased overnight, we still have the option of rolling back the clock and pouring our own plates. This however, is very much dependent on the availability of the raw chemicals - The way things are going, even the purchase of sodium chloride might become restricted to a few licensed individuals at some point in the future.

Thank you

Thanks so much for all of the replies. Nice to see so many passionate analogers online. Mark, your post was very well said. Also, I did not realize there were so many smaller companies/projects underway to keep film production going.

So many comments here that said stay in the moment...good advice, the exact reason I love film.

I don't share the view that we will have long-term availability of film; the reality is that it is a secondary and shrinking market under no pressure whatsoever to keep going at the behest of so few. I take the view people should have began skilling up with the alternative (digital) method of photography so they have something to fall back on. It is not the industry's fault that so many will be left with so little to nothing within 10 years. Excellent results are achievable with the alternative method even if film, for all its worth and beauty, will face an ever-tightening noose. You might want to reflect on the loss of a number of films in the last two years, and the likelihood of Fujifilm, dealing with the colour market, discontinuing two more emulsions this year.

It is not the fault of the camera (analog or digital) that the photographer cannot recreate a scene to his satisfaction. It is the fault of the photographer not going equipped with the knowledge of how things are done. It is the height if ignorance for any person here to suggest that digital is obsolete the moment you such a camera. Says who, and on what grounds? People I know here on APUG are producing work on 10 year old digital cameras and that work is beautiful. There is skill involved in it. So too, there is still involved with analog. Says who that they need a camera costing $4,000? And why? True, there is a captive market out there of gear freaks who must have every single pixel to peep at— it is ridiculous: leave them to their misery. It is absolutely unnecessary; one camera for as long as you want it, same as analogue: you don't buy a $6,000 Nikon every 6 months, so where is the argument that the same should apply to digital, supposedly "because it is still evolving"? That's bullshit. Is somebody here going to tell me that RGB screens, profiles, colourimetrics, RIPs... "are still evolving"?

I would like to see film continue for a long time. But you can whistle Dixie until the cows come home that we are going to be hit again with progressive discontinuations until there is too little left to sustain a miniscule market, unless of course you want to step back 140 years and roll your own plates and chemistry. While we have two options at our disposal, both should be used. As I said, it is not the fault of which medium you use, but the fault of the photographer.

Last edited by Poisson Du Jour; 07-21-2013 at 07:53 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Sort of true Gary - I do most commercial work with digital and have done for about 5 years now - my old Canon 5D is no longer supported by Canon's own capture software, which makes it irritating to use, so that's a forced upgrade for productivity reasons alone. Canon also doesn't support the software for my EOS1v either, but that was a gimmick thing anyway, and doesn't stop the camera being as useful as it ever was...

One other point is that, I routinely post large albums of personal 5x4" work on Facebook, and this generates me a lot of commercial work in unrelated photographic fields - it's like the 'awesomeness' of the large format inspires 'confidence' in my ability to generate good work in that other format :-)

When I set up for a batch of product shots for our web site, I always tether my D7000. Makes it easy to tear off 40 or 50 shots in quick order.

Marc's comment about obsolete/unsupported software gets to the real fragility of digital: It depends on a much 'deeper' slice of our existing industrial/technological infrastructure. Trivial things like memory cards...will they be available in the required format in 20 or 30 years? Assuming you can capture an image, what can you do with it? Will PP tools 50 years hence work with RAW formats from today's Canikon cameras? Etc, etc, etc. Digital sits atop an enormous collection of accumulated technology.

Of course, analog has the same issues, if to a lesser extent. The declining variety of commercially available films demonstrates that.

None the less, my 15 yo daughter has taken an interest in my 32 yo K1000, which still works perfectly. I have no such expectation of my D7000 32 years from now.

I don't share the view that we will have long-term availability of film; the reality is that it is a secondary and shrinking market under no pressure whatsoever to keep going at the behest of so few. I take the view people should have began skilling up with the alternative (digital) method of photography so they have something to fall back on.

No thanks. If film ever entirely disappears in my lifetime (which it won't), I'm done.

Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.